Abstract The late Dr Coline Covington died on July 17, 2023, leaving a considerable, rich body of books and articles combining psychoanalytic ideas with historical, political, philosophical and social theory. She was a Training Analyst and Supervisor of the Society of Analytical Psychology (SAP) and the British Psychotherapy Foundation (BPF). With a background in political science and forensic criminology, she was a Fellow of International Dialogue Initiative (IDI), a group formed by Professor Dr Vamik Volkan, Lord Alderdice, and Dr Robi Friedman to apply psychoanalytic concepts in understanding political conflict and the effects of trauma on political behaviour. This paper is an attempt to introduce some of her ideas, psychoanalytic practice and innovative thinking to SAP colleagues who may not be so familiar with her oeuvre. I will acknowledge some of her earlier books/papers of interest briefly and then focus more intensively on her recent trilogy of publications presenting a psychoanalytic exploration of political psychology. Her first book, Everyday Evils: A Psychoanalytic View of Evil and Morality (2017), addresses atrocities arising from perverted belief systems but which are nevertheless based on a powerful need to belong. Her second book, For Goodness Sake: Bravery, Patriotism and Identity (2020), suggests that the same belief system also inspires acts of bravery and patriotism. Her third book, Who’s to Blame? Collective Guilt on Trial (2023), challenges the concept of collective guilt associated with the aftermath of large‐scale atrocities and examines the moral pressure placed on perpetrators to exhibit guilt as part of a realignment of political power and a process of restoring social morality.

Abstract For both Jung and Shakespeare, one‐sidedness is the fundamental tragic trait. Jung proposed that as an individual develops, they inevitably associate their identity with certain modes of perception and interaction, and that this leads to psychological polarization. The preferred function takes on a dominant role as ontological filter of the individual’s worldview, while the disregarded function remains unhewn and volcanic, left largely outside of conscious control. Jung insists that one‐sidedness, the over‐development of one side of the personality at the expense of the opposite “inferior” function, is a dangerous weakness. Likewise, Bradley (1905, p. 21) observes that in almost all of Shakespeare’s tragic protagonists, “we observe a marked one‐sidedness, … a fatal tendency to identify the whole being with one interest, object, passion, or habit of mind.” This article will outline the clear parallel between the structure of Shakespearean tragedy and the psyche as Jung understood it. It will do so through the juxtaposition of Coriolanus and Timon of Athens, in which the same functions are attributed opposite value. The contrast of these two plays seen through the lens of Jung’s Psychological Types will help us to understand the perils presented by one‐sidedness and the under‐theorized inferior function, and will flesh out the concepts of Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Feeling via amplification.

Abstract The psychology of C. G. Jung is known for its focus on the inner life and a tendency toward introversion. In recent years, however, there has been increasing emphasis on political activism and advocacy in depth psychology in general, not least in Jungian circles. Jung was highly suspicious of mass movements and warned that extreme positions tend to become their opposite ( enantiodromia ). He also warned of the danger of secular or banal matters being imbued with archetypal significance through projection and how this leads to fanaticism. This paper addresses the role of analytical psychology in an increasingly politicized world, turning first to the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn 'Arabī who proposed a tertiary vision that was capable of perceiving the barzakh, the line that divides as well as connects the opposites. I then illustrate this with the life and teachings of the Malian Sufi, Tierno Bokar, and finish with a discussion of jihād , an Islamic term that refers to both outer and inner struggle. I conclude that the choice facing Jungian psychology is not limited to a simple binary of action vs. inaction but includes a third, more challenging position.